Worth appealing? Opinions please

lizzy0503

I have had a quick read of the Newbies thread regarding parking charges and think I know what my next step should be should I decide to continue to dispute my PCN, but would really appreciate independent advice on whether I have a valid case worth pursuing.

My son parked at Redbridge LU Stn recently. Being in a hurry to catch his train he parked in the only space available,his bonnet to the rear of another car which was at the end of a double row of cars, and he bought and displayed a valid ticket.

On returning he had a parking notice on his car due to "Not parked correctly within the markings of the bay space" He then noticed while the car in front was parked within a full sized marked bay his own car bay space was smaller than a car size. His car was causing no inconvenience or hazard to other drivers, and the car park would have suffered no loss of earnings from him parking where he did so he is at a loss why this was not a full sized bay. I have the photos but as a longtime member of MSE but only one previous post I am not allowed to post links.

He had the opportunity to pay a reduced amount but left the country on holiday and didnt return until after the 14 days were up. He's now received a NTK with the fine having risen to £100. While he understands he did park incorrectly the charge seems very hefty and we would like to know whether people think he has any chance of winning an appeal to have the charge reduced or quashed.

bazster

Who issued the ticket?

lizzy0503

Sorry, the ticket is from NCP

lizzy0503

I've again read the Newbies thread and the template letters to appeal to NCP about the PCN, but am concerned over what to do next. I'm being a bit dense and confused, and scared/worried that by messing it up I may incur further fees for my son to pay.

Am I correct in thinking if I appeal to NCP and it gets rejected (which I believe it usually does) I can then have it referred to POPLA for appeal and even if they also reject it the charge to pay will still be the £100?

Secondly, the photograph evidence supplied by NCP show the signs about parking within marked bays. My son didn't park within a marked bay, but it did look like there should be a bay there, and parking in a hurry he just didn't check properly. However he was causing no hazard or inconvenience to other drivers. In fact the photos supplied seems to show plenty of space behind and to the side of his car.

So being as he was actually in the wrong in not parking within a marked bay is the appeal based purely on the unreasonable charge they are making?

Finally, is the wording at the end of NCP's NTK standard or something I need to take into account when they say "NCP as owner, lawful occupier, or agent of the landowner, has the right to seek payment of this parking charge". The wording on their sign says 'This car Park is managed on behalf of London Underground'.

Any advice really would be appreciated, sorry for being such a woos, but I'm tying myself up in knots here trying to decipher the advice in the Newbies threads and wondering if it would just be better to pay and be done with

Redx

if you fail the PPC and also fail at popla, the £100 charge is payable, but can be ignored as popla is not binding on the motorist, only on the operator

I would appeal

the template letter should be sent "as is" , no alterations , to NCP

for popla , you would use a legal argument appeal based on at least the following (if not more)

flaws in NTK (if applicable)
not meeting POFA 2012 (if applicable)
no contract (no locus standii) - anyway
poor signage - anyway
not a gpeol - anyway
the Beavis paragraph in blue - anyway

tykesi

Why isn't your son dealing with this?

lizzy0503

tykesi wrote: »

Why isn't your son dealing with this?

Because if I left it to him nothing would get done and we'd be going down the route of getting Debt Collectors letters :eek: .

He also works stupidly long hours, and working an 8 or 9 day straight is quite normal, so when he does get a day off he doesn't want to be nagged by me to get this sorted.....

....and yes I'am also an overprotective mum who does far too much for her kids :rotfl:

Quentin

lizzy0503 wrote: »

Because if I left it to him nothing would get done and we'd be going down the route of getting Debt Collectors letters :eek: .....

If you are doing this to avoid debt collectors then you should be aware that unless your appeal succeeds that this is the highly likely next step.

lizzy0503

Quentin wrote: »

If you are doing this to avoid debt collectors then you should be aware that unless your appeal succeeds that this is the highly likely next step.

If the POPLA appeal fails wouldn't there still be the opportunity to pay before it got to the Debt Collectors stage?

Quentin

Yes.


(Though not recommended of course)


He should really just brace himself for debt collectors and if they send letters just file or throw them away

lizzy0503

Guys, please be patient with me. I thought I knew exactly what my next step should be regarding the template letter to NCP, but do I really include all of it, even though it doesn't all seem relevant? For example the photos they've sent show the signage, and I can't hand on heart say they weren't seen or appear ambiguous, but do I just include it anyway? Also the "Drop Hands" seems harshly worded, can I omit that part? Lastly should I anywhere point out in this initial appeal that the driver bought and displayed a ticket in good faith, and while the photos show the vehicle was indeed not in a marked bay it was also not causing hazard or obstruction and they have not lost any income from where it was parked?

I guess I'm struggling because the photos clearly show the vehicle was not within a bay, and had the charge been smaller with a valid explanation as to why vehicles shouldn't park here I would be encouraging my son to just pay up. If only it were that easy!

Thanks in advance.